Yes, to a very large extent.
How could there be options in a deterministic world?
- Bahman
- Posts: 213
- Joined: July 3rd, 2016, 11:51 am
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
-
- Posts: 54
- Joined: February 16th, 2023, 10:50 pm
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
Each neuron keeps firing, so you say. Then, there is no pause. Your logic falls apart. The appearance of a delay is because information can't travel faster than light. My PS4 lags when I play GTA Online. Maybe my PS4 has free will.Bahman wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 11:58 am The heart of my argument is the coincidence of subjective experience of options and the pause in our physical and mental activity. I am arguing that this coincidence can not be due to chance so we can trust the subjective experience and be sure about the existence of options.
- Bahman
- Posts: 213
- Joined: July 3rd, 2016, 11:51 am
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
There is a difference between the state of the brain and the state of each neuron.Carter Blunt wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 1:58 pmEach neuron keeps firing, so you say. Then, there is no pause. Your logic falls apart. The appearance of a delay is because information can't travel faster than light. My PS4 lags when I play GTA Online. Maybe my PS4 has free will.Bahman wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 11:58 am The heart of my argument is the coincidence of subjective experience of options and the pause in our physical and mental activity. I am arguing that this coincidence can not be due to chance so we can trust the subjective experience and be sure about the existence of options.
- JohniJones
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 4
- Joined: May 6th, 2015, 8:36 pm
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
In order for the world to be deterministic there must be an independent world of enduring objects that can support and present it.
How are such objects, whether physical or not, even possible?
It is not possible.
Do objects announce their own physical boundaries, do they establish their own limits, boundaries and existence?
Of course, we would have to say no.
How then, can we argue even for the possibility of a deterministic world?
- Agent Smyth
- Posts: 71
- Joined: March 21st, 2023, 6:43 am
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
"So young, 24 you say?" asked Daniel. "Yep, 24, poor chap. He was engaged to this charming young lass. What a tragedy!" replied Fred. "How did he die? Cancer?" Daniel pressed on. "No, no, he was in good health. It was a trip to Alaska" Fred responded. "Why, what do you mean?" queried Daniel, inquistive as ever. "Well, it's quite a story really. He apparently mistook a bear for a dog! Gruesome wat to die, eh?" Daniel nodded in agreement as he tried to work out how a 24 year old could make such a stupid mistake.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
What my lecturer told me was complete at the time for programming the Maximop Computer and the Commodore PETs we were using at the time.Pattern-chaser wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 9:46 amWhat your lecturer told you was ... incomplete. Trying to get a computer to generate random numbers is difficult and challenging. There are quite a few ways to approximate randomness, and one or two that might allow the computer to 'consult' an external source of randomness, such as the famous array of lava lamps. In most cases, computers use pseudo-random sequences, not truly random ones, and yes, if restarted at the same point, they will always deliver the same answer(s).
It is well-known, in programming circles, that library functions like "RND()" are poor approximations to randomness, but they are adequate for most applications, strangely enough. Especially when they are adapted to suit a particular need, such as seeding the sequence as you describe.
There was not the resources to hook up a string of lava lamps!!
In practice all you had to do was ask the operator for to interrupt from long count in an infinite loop. The for/next would give a seed number for the RND function.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
No it is exactly on topic, and your answer reveals that you have not thought through why it might be the case.Bahman wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 11:03 amThat is off-topic but I answer it. I choose freely by my mind. I believe in a new version of substance dualism.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑March 21st, 2023, 7:35 pmEasy.Bahman wrote: ↑March 20th, 2023, 12:37 pm To understand the implication of the question we need to understand what determinism is. Determinism is a doctrine that states that the future state of a system is uniquely determined in terms of the current state of the system. This means that there exists only one option, the future state, at any given time. We however without any doubt say that we experience options in our daily life. We pause and think about options and eventually choose one of them. The very existence of the pause means that the brain is also interrupted as well with the situation so one cannot say, as determinists say, that only one of the options is real. So options are real since otherwise, the state of the brain evolves deterministically without any pause one option is chosen and others are disregarded. Now that we established options are real we face the question of "How could there be options in a deterministic world?".
How on earth can you make a choice freely?? Based on what exactly?
You cannot "chose freely" since all your answers have to be determined by your current state of being.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
Why do you think this is an objection?value wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 11:18 amA computer is not the one that chooses to run a computation. The computer is merely a tool in the hands of a human (an extension). The choice to run a computation is done in the face of an unknown future and therefore involves a moral valuation of which it cannot be said that it was predetermined.Sculptor1 wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 8:00 amThis is a good point.Good_Egg wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 4:05 am Way back when, I wrote small computer programs to do calculations.
Rerunning the same program would always give the same answer - the computer operates deterministically. But there was a noticable time lag while it went through the process of calculation.
To me, knowing that it would generate the same answer as last time, the pause before the answer came up on the screen might have seemed unnecessary. But the computer has no knowledge of what last time's answer was. Determinism gives it no short-cut to the answer; it grinds through the same number manipulations every time.
So the argument from the fact of a pause to indeterminacy is false.
(Modern computers are arguably less predictable, because they're running umpteen other processes in the background...)
When I learned programming I was horrified to find out that even a random number generator gave the same number each time I re-ran the programme.
For example a program whose job it was to roll a dice would alway come up with the same sequence,1,2,4,3,3,5,3,6,2,4,2....repeated on RUN.
The lecturer informed me that a computer cannot generate a real random number and has to use a list of numbers which the RND() string selects.
To invoke unpredictability I learned was that if you seeded the RND function with a time signature, then it would always select from a different part of the list each time you "throw to dice" RND(6)+1. This would always achieve a different sequence. But you have to ask your self - is ANYTHING truly random. Surely when you throw a dice the laws of physics determine the trajectory, vector, bounce, rotation, so that when it leaves your hand the result of a fait accompli.
And when you make a choice, your motivation and volition at that moment determine the outcome?
So is not the will compatible with determination, and determinism?
Therefore a human pause - the 'moral consideration' that takes place before a choice - isn't similar to computer processing.
The fact that this shows is that in the real world events are determined by antecedent conditions. And there is no reason why the human body should be an exception to the laws of nature.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7091
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
No, you do not get to pick and chose which bits you want nature to act.Bahman wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 12:14 pmYes, to a very large extent.
Either reality is deterministic or it is not, you do not get to decide that you are an exception.
-
- Posts: 2181
- Joined: January 7th, 2015, 7:09 am
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
In the context I gave I don't think noting one type of correlation is enough to draw conclusions from. And Libet and subsequent similar experiments offer a different perspective on a 'readiness potential' pause you might want to check out. I also disagree that there's a pause in physical brain activity or mental activity when we consider options - did you really mean to say that?Bahman wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 11:58 amThe mind becomes important when it comes to making a decision when there is a conflict of interest in options. That is an interesting but different problem. My point however is how options could possibly be real in a deterministic world. I have an argument for the realness of options though. The heart of my argument is the coincidence of subjective experience of options and the pause in our physical and mental activity. I am arguing that this coincidence can not be due to chance so we can trust the subjective experience and be sure about the existence of options.Gertie wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 6:44 amTo understand the issue, first you have to consider what it is that people think makes the universe deterministic. Whether that is correct or not, and whether there can be exceptions.Bahman wrote: ↑March 20th, 2023, 12:37 pm To understand the implication of the question we need to understand what determinism is. Determinism is a doctrine that states that the future state of a system is uniquely determined in terms of the current state of the system. This means that there exists only one option, the future state, at any given time. We however without any doubt say that we experience options in our daily life. We pause and think about options and eventually choose one of them. The very existence of the pause means that the brain is also interrupted as well with the situation so one cannot say, as determinists say, that only one of the options is real. So options are real since otherwise, the state of the brain evolves deterministically without any pause one option is chosen and others are disregarded. Now that we established options are real we face the question of "How could there be options in a deterministic world?".
Many assume the universe is deterministic because we see predictable patterns, which Physicalism has modelled as laws, or forces, acting on matter. QM introduces an underlying probabilistic element, but that isn't really what we mean by options, choices, or mentally willing our behaviour in contrast to physicalist determinism.
In your post you point to pausing for thought, mentally weighing options and making choices based on mind somehow intervening in these physical processes when it comes to brains.
As far as we know, there are no physical brain processes which are in principle not following physicalist deterministic laws in response to physical stimuli. The pause then could reflect the complex physical brain processes taking time, or perhaps never, hitting the threshold to instigate motor neuron behaviour.
But - we don't understand the relationship between mind and body. And we can just as easily point to the evolutionary utlitity of being able to mentally reason through decisions, weigh options, imagine the consequences of different decisions, etc. Not to mention the obvious evolutionary utility of feeling hunger, satiety, lust, care, comfort, pain, memory, etc. There's an obvious functional (evolutionary) account of the role of our mental states which makes sense of our behaviour too. And creates room for options which at least escape physicalist determinism, but perhaps raises an issue of psychological determinism - my psychology is such that it is inevitable I will make specific choices, that I will prioritise this over that option, just like I will remove my hand from a burning fire. (Some see a 'compatabilistic' approach to options making sense here). Never-the-less, this raises the possibility we can in effect mentally intervene in the physical brain processes, mind over matter. And if mental experience is simply causally redundant epiphenomenal baggage, why does it look so well attuned to utility...
These two explanatory accounts, the mental and physical, run in parallel. And as far as we can tell are closely related through our observations of neural correlation. Raising the additional problem of over-determinism.
Without understanding the mind-body relationship, which we don't, the question and apparent paradoxes remain unanswerable.
But anyway I gave an alternative possibility to that point within my post -
As far as we know, there are no physical brain processes which are in principle not following physicalist deterministic laws in response to physical stimuli. The pause then could reflect the complex physical brain processes taking time, or perhaps never, hitting the threshold to instigate motor neuron behaviour.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
You are correct that from the POV of the subject (prospectively) there is no difference currently between Free Will and Determinism, that is both appear as Free Will to our ability to perceive it.Ecurb wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 10:40 amIs there really a "fundamental difference" (from our point of view)? Is fate vs. free will a philosophical problem, or a lingusitic puzzle?LuckyR wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 1:02 am
A couple of things.
First, common spoken language (words like choose, select, opt and options) reflect Free Will because the entirety of human experience is consistent with there being Free Will. Whereas none of human experience is consistent with a Deterministic universe as far as animal decision making is concerned. Determinism (as pertains to decision making) exists exclusively in the minds of philosophers who believe in it. Having said that, it is true that decision making could be determined, that is it has NOT been disproven.
Thus there is a fundamental difference between a universe where you ponder where to have lunch and you truly select to eat at McDonald's instead of Pizza Hut (that is, either was possible) and a universe where given your memories of your past experiences, your state of mind and the status of a myriad of other variables you will ALWAYS select McDonalds even though you may consider Pizza Hut.
Of course there are reasons for choices. Does that mean they are not freely made?
The card player thinks there is a 1/13 chance of drawing an ace off the top of the deck. But, of course, he is wrong. Either there is an ace on the top, or their isn't. Anyone who can see the other side of the card knows there is either a 100% or 0% chance of drawing an ace. It's already been determined, after the shuffle. But are the card players calculations incorrect? I'd suggest they are not. He is calculating properly from his point of view.
The same is the case with free will. If our choice is "free" (unconstrained by other people), it's perfectly reasonable to talk about free will. It's coherent and meaningful. Why is the concept of free will negated just because we make choices for a reason?
My point is this: I don't think determinism and free will are contradictory or mutually exclusive.
Thus Determinism as you supposed only exists in the mind of philosophers.
As to playing cards, there is a 1/13 chance of an ace being on the top (jokers excluded), but there is either a 100% or 0% CERTAINTY that it is an ace. Those two declarations address separate things.
I don't personally subscribe to your (apparent) definition of Free Will, which sounds to my ears like "random", that is: uninflenced. My definition is: antecedant state A does NOT always lead to resultant state B, sometimes it is C.
-
- Posts: 2138
- Joined: May 9th, 2012, 3:13 pm
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
The problem is that if antecedant state A unknown, or unknowable (as in the case of the deck of cards), the convenient fiction of free will is reasonable and meaningful. I suppose it is likely that if we knew (or even could know) everything, the world (like the deck of cards) would be deterministic. Since we can't know everything the world is not deterministic, from our point of view. And what other point of view is there? God's?LuckyR wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 4:34 pm
You are correct that from the POV of the subject (prospectively) there is no difference currently between Free Will and Determinism, that is both appear as Free Will to our ability to perceive it.
Thus Determinism as you supposed only exists in the mind of philosophers.
As to playing cards, there is a 1/13 chance of an ace being on the top (jokers excluded), but there is either a 100% or 0% CERTAINTY that it is an ace. Those two declarations address separate things.
I don't personally subscribe to your (apparent) definition of Free Will, which sounds to my ears like "random", that is: uninflenced. My definition is: antecedant state A does NOT always lead to resultant state B, sometimes it is C.
As Tennyson observed:
Since we can't understand the flower root and all, we don't know what God and man is (also, it doesn't rhyme). If we could understand, the world would propably be deterministic. But we can't.Flower in the crannied wall,
I pluck you out of the crannies,
I hold you here, root and all, in my hand,
Little flower–but if I could understand
What you are, root and all, and all in all,
I should know what God and man is.
- JackDaydream
- Posts: 3218
- Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
The issue of free choice is central to the issue of free will vs determinism but the nature of options are variable according to past causal processes, with some having more available options than others. These include social aspects of freedom including financial resources and past actions. For example, a person who has wealth may have more practical possible options than someone who doesn't and someone who has the education and certain experiences may have more options than someone who is in a lower position. Also, people may have more options than someone at a later stage because they are bound by circumstances from the past.Ecurb wrote: ↑March 21st, 2023, 7:08 pm"I opted to have lunch at McDonalds yesterday."LuckyR wrote: ↑March 21st, 2023, 5:39 pmOK, let's make sure we're speaking of the same things. The fact that animals pause and go through the process of decision making does NOT prove that there are legitimate options. It is possible that the process of "decision making" will 100% of the time lead to a pre determined outcome, given the pre conditions. Of course there is absolutely no subjective or objective experience consistent with this scenario, but it is technically possible.Bahman wrote: ↑March 21st, 2023, 12:30 pmBut how could that be true? There are two things when we are dealing with options, the subjective experience of options and the interruption in our activity where the latter is due to the fact that the brain is in an undecided state. First, these two things cannot coincide by chance. Second, if one of the options is predetermined then why does the person who is dealing with options pause at all?
I cannot, of course, opt otherwise at this stage of the game. Nonetheless, the sentence is coherent, descriptive, and meaningful. If we can "choose" in the past tense, surely we can choose in the present tense. "Options" is a meaningful word whether or not they are determined.
So, in that sense, your query about options is not about choice per se, but about the scope of freedom itself. The circumstances rather than simply intentional choice come into play. It may at times be like someone handing over all their money, but with a gun held to their head. The choice would have been made but it was about the constraints of circumstances, but with restricted options. In other words, options are not simply about intentionality but about options as the actual potential pathways of choice perceived to be potential pathways at any given point and given knowledge of these.
- JackDaydream
- Posts: 3218
- Joined: July 25th, 2021, 5:16 pm
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
I was really intending my reply to Bahman, but after reading later posts I accidentally sent it to Ecurb. So, I am not sure if it will appear incongruous in response to Ecurb's post. So, I apologise if my post has messed up the flow of conversation, because it was really meant as a different angle for thinking about Bahman's question.
- LuckyR
- Moderator
- Posts: 7935
- Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am
Re: How could there be options in a deterministic world?
To my mind you are conflating the appearance of the universe (to us humans) from how it operates. To me the universe would operate just fine in the absence of humans to observe it. Thus the deck of cards behaves like a deck of cards whether the faces are known, unknown or unknowable (an ace will show up 1/13 of the time, for example). Or to use your metaphor, flowers were flowers (and gods were gods) before there were people to observe them.Ecurb wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 5:41 pmThe problem is that if antecedant state A unknown, or unknowable (as in the case of the deck of cards), the convenient fiction of free will is reasonable and meaningful. I suppose it is likely that if we knew (or even could know) everything, the world (like the deck of cards) would be deterministic. Since we can't know everything the world is not deterministic, from our point of view. And what other point of view is there? God's?LuckyR wrote: ↑March 22nd, 2023, 4:34 pm
You are correct that from the POV of the subject (prospectively) there is no difference currently between Free Will and Determinism, that is both appear as Free Will to our ability to perceive it.
Thus Determinism as you supposed only exists in the mind of philosophers.
As to playing cards, there is a 1/13 chance of an ace being on the top (jokers excluded), but there is either a 100% or 0% CERTAINTY that it is an ace. Those two declarations address separate things.
I don't personally subscribe to your (apparent) definition of Free Will, which sounds to my ears like "random", that is: uninflenced. My definition is: antecedant state A does NOT always lead to resultant state B, sometimes it is C.
As Tennyson observed:
Since we can't understand the flower root and all, we don't know what God and man is (also, it doesn't rhyme). If we could understand, the world would propably be deterministic. But we can't.Flower in the crannied wall,
I pluck you out of the crannies,
I hold you here, root and all, in my hand,
Little flower–but if I could understand
What you are, root and all, and all in all,
I should know what God and man is.
Ultimately it comes down to the question: is the process of human decision making physical? Can the psychologic be reduced to the neurologic?
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023